[Talk-ca] Bicycle boulevards

[Paul Johnson]

Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> 2009/6/10 Shaun McDonald <shaun at shaunmcdonald.me.uk>:
>> In my eyes, that road would be simply tagged with highway=cycleway.
> 
> there are some main differences though: usually they are normal
> streets changed in designation. That is cars are allowed but don't
> have the priority and must drive very slowly, they have
> pavements/sidewalks, they are wide like streets, the give priority to
> bicycles on crossings, etc. all of which is not the case for
> cycleways.

Sidewalks are optional, some bicycle boulevards are actually pretty bad
for pedestrians in places where houses don't have driveways, in which
case sidewalks were eliminated to move on-street parking farther from
the center to avoid car-door conflicts with passing bicycle traffic
(these are pretty rare, most bicycle boulevards prohibit parking entirely).

And at least in the US and Canada, the speed limits are the same for
cyclists and cars alike (typically 25mph or metric approximation, though
there's been talks of bumping it up to 30 on bicycle boulevards to
accommodate faster commuters).

Cycleways typically have priority over residential streets, more major
cycleways typically have some kind of signalling system over more major
streets, with the most major cycleways being limited-access,
grade-separated operations similar to motorized expressways.  Only the
most minor, go-nowhere park greenways don't have priority at
intersections (rationale being the motorists can wait being merely
privileged users and requiring next to no effort to get moving again,
cyclists have a right to the streets (unlike licensed motorists) and
would have to expend real effort to get moving again).

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 260 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20090610/8d983ab3/attachment.pgp>